Method and management agent for event notifications correlation

ABSTRACT

Methods and agent for correlating event notifications are provided wherein the agent comprises an interface receiving an event notification, a Peer Agent Notification Category List (PANCL) storing peer agent notification categories of event notifications that other agents are interested in receiving from the agent, and a notifications processing engine that determines if the event notification matches the peer agent notification categories of the PANCL. Upon positive determination the first event notification is sent at least to a second agent associated with the matched peer agent notification category of the PANCL. In another aspect, the agent comprises a manager notifications log storing identities of event notifications sent from the agent to the manager and a notifications processing engine that determines if a received peer agent event notification matches any event notifications of the log. Upon positive determination, the engine correlates the peer agent event notification with the event notification of the log.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a method and management agent for eventnotifications correlation.

2. Description of the Related Art

A large telecommunication management network includes various types ofNetwork Resources (NRs). NRs may include communications nodes thatinsure the service provision to network subscribers, such as for examplein the case of a cellular telecommunications network. Such a network mayinclude nodes like Mobile Switching Centers (MSCs), Base StationControllers (BSCs), Base Stations (BSs), Packet Data Service Nodes(PDSNs), Home Location Registers (HLRs), Home Agents (HAs) and the like,which are viewed as NRs from the perspective of the telecommunicationmanagement network. The later exercises supervision, monitoring, andcontrol on its NRs. Within the management network, the NRs arerepresented by a set of software objects called Management Objects(MOs), which are maintained using various network managementapplications.

The use of software objects (i.e. of the MO instances) to represent theNRs for large networks management is a key characteristics of modemnetwork management paradigms such as those advanced by theTelecommunication management network (TMN) of the InternationalTelecommunication Union -Telecommunication Standardization Sector(ITU-T) and by the 3^(rd) Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)Integration Reference Point framework for 3G wireless networks.

In a large telecommunication management network, there is a distinctionbetween one type of application called manager and another type ofapplication called agent. In general, the agent manages the NRs onbehalf of managers, i.e. the managers do not directly interact with theNRs. Rather, the managers control the NRs by sending instructions toagents, that in turns control the NRs. In such a context, the agenttypically has a Management Information Base (MIB), called agent-MIB,which is a collection of MOs (including their attributes) representingall NRs under management of that agent. Each manager also has a MIB,called manager-MIB that holds this particular manager's perspective orknowledge about the NRs under its management in the form of MOs as well.

Accordingly, the principle that in large telecommunication networks themanager does not interact directly with the NRs, but rather with one ormore agents linked to a set of NRs is widely used and well documented inthe telecommunications industry.

One key element of the modern telecommunication network management isfor agents to report and for managers to timely receive network eventnotifications (also called herein notifications or alarm notifications),such as occurrences of NR state changes and NR alarms. Reception ofnetwork events by managers allow managers to have the current view ofthe state of affairs of the network so that they can perform analysis,such as network alarm root cause identification, network traffic trends,etc.

The way managers receive the network events is typically as follows. Oneagent is responsible for the management of a group of NRs. Each agent isresponsible to report state changes of its managed NRs in a form ofevent notifications and maintains a notification log and an Active AlarmList (AAL). The log tracks all notifications that are emitted toward themanager, while the AAL tracks all notifications carrying active alarminformation received from NRs. Active alarm notifications are defined asalarm notifications that are not yet cleared and not yet acknowledged bythe manager. The manager can pull/read the contents of the log and ofthe AAL whenever it needs. Each agent may send notifications of itsmanaged NRs to multiple managers.

In prior art implementations, agents emit notifications to report NRstate changes solely to their corresponding managers. Agents do notreport these notifications to other peer agents. Network state changesreported in these notifications may be caused by a certain event of anetwork node (e.g. a software module of a network node has restarted) ornetwork link (e.g. cable is cut). More importantly, the occurrence of anevent of a network node or network link normally affects multiple NRstates.

Since each agent is reporting its own notifications to its correspondingmanager and not to its peer agents, the notifications of various agentsare never correlated at the agents level, i.e. the information containedin one notification from one agent cannot indicate that it is related toanother notification of another agent, even if the notifications arecaused by the same network event. As a consequence, the manager has toprocess received notifications from various agents and performnotification correlation, which is a resource-consuming task.

Thus, today's state-of-the-art solutions put a heavy burden in terms ofprocessing activity on the managers, because notifications received froman agent cannot be correlated with notifications from another agentbefore they are received in the manager. This leads to unnecessarysignalling load between the agents and the manager, such as for examplewhen multiple notifications related to the same cause are sent to themanager from multiple agents. This leads to unnecessary processingexecution at the manager that may result in an overload or even afailure for the later, thus creating a hazardous situation, since in agiven network, the role of a manager is critical.

Although there is no prior art solution as the one proposed hereinafterfor solving the above-mentioned deficiencies, the U.S. Pat. No.6,000,045 issued to Lewis (hereinafter called Lewis) bears some relationwith the field of the present invention. In Lewis, there is disclosedthe multi-domain network manager, which provides alarm correlation amonga plurality of domains included in the communications network.Individual network management systems monitor single respective domainof the communications network and provide alarms indicative of statusspecific to the single respective domain. A multi-domain network managerreceives the alarms and correlates them to provide inter-domain alarmsas well as responses in the form of corrective actions. The managerprovides a high level of correlation and response for the entirenetwork. In this reference, it is solely the multi-domain manager thatperforms alarm correlation, while the other network entities, such asthe network management systems, only function to relay the alarms frothe network resources to the manager. Conclusively, Lewis' teaching islimited to a method for correlating alarms within a manager, which againputs the heavy processing burden related to alarm correlation on themanager.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Accordingly, it should be readily appreciated that in order to overcomethe deficiencies and shortcomings of the existing solutions, it would beadvantageous to have a method and a corresponding agent for effectivelycorrelating notifications that originate from NRs before they reach themanager, i.e. at the agent level. The present invention provides such amethod and system.

In one aspect, the present invention is a method for correlating eventnotifications comprising several steps. First, a first agent of amanagement network receives a first event notification and determines ifthe first event notification matches a peer agent notification categorythat defines a category of event notifications a second agent of themanagement network is interested in receiving from the first agent.Then, upon positive determination, the first agent sends the first eventnotification to the second agent, so that the second manager cancorrelate the first event notification with its own event notifications.

In another aspect, the present invention is a first agent of amanagement network comprising an input interface receiving a first eventnotification, a Peer Agent Notification Category List (PANCL) storingone or more peer agent notification categories, each being indicative ofa category of event notifications that other agents are interested inreceiving from the first agent, and a notifications processing enginereceiving the first event notification from the input interface anddetermining if the first event notification matches the peer agentnotification categories of the PANCL, and upon positive determination,the notifications processing engine sending the first event notificationat least to a second agent associated with a matched peer agentnotification category of the PANCL.

In yet another aspect, the present invention is a method for correlatingevent notifications that first allows for the receiving at a first agentof a management network a peer agent event notification from a peeragent. Then the method allows determining at the first agent if the peeragent event notification matches any event notifications that the firstagent sent to a manager, and, upon determining that the peer agent eventnotification matches an event notification that the first agent sent toa manager, the method allows correlating the peer agent eventnotification with the event notification the first agent sent to amanager.

In yet another aspect, the present invention is a first agent of amanagement network, comprising an input interface receiving a peer agentevent notification from a peer agent, a manager notifications logstoring identities of event notifications sent from the first agent to amanager of the management network, and a notifications processing enginereceiving the peer agent event notification from the input interface anddetermining if the received peer agent event notification matches anyevent notifications of the manager notifications log and, upondetermining that the peer agent event notification matches an eventnotification of the log, correlating the peer agent event notificationwith the event notification of the log.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

For a more detailed understanding of the invention, for further objectsand advantages thereof, reference can now be made to the followingdescription, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, inwhich:

FIG. 1 is an exemplary simplified block diagram of a telecommunicationnode such as a management agent implementing the preferred embodiment ofthe present invention;

FIG. 2 is an exemplary nodal operation and signal flow diagram of amanagement network implementing the preferred embodiment of the presentinvention; and

FIG. 3 is another exemplary nodal operation and signal flow diagram of amanagement network implementing the preferred embodiment of the presentinvention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The innovative teachings of the present invention will be described withparticular reference to various exemplary embodiments. However, itshould be understood that this class of embodiments provides only a fewexamples of the many advantageous uses of the innovative teachings ofthe invention. In general, statements made in the specification of thepresent application do not necessarily limit any of the various claimedaspects of the present invention. Moreover, some statements may apply tosome inventive features but not to others. In the drawings, like orsimilar elements are designated with identical reference numeralsthroughout the several views.

The present invention provides a method and an agent that allows for thecorrelation of event notifications at the agents' level, among aplurality of agents, before such notifications reach a manager of amanagement network. When a given agent receives an NR notification, thisagent may attempt to correlate the NR notification with othernotifications received from cooperating peer agents, so that when themanager received the correlated NR notification it can easily match itwith the other related notifications, without necessitating the use ofextensive processing resources. Similarly, when an agent receives anotification from a cooperating peer agent, it attempts to correlate itwith other notifications it knows of, that may be received either fromits NRs, or from other peer agents.

Reference is now made to FIG. 1, which shows a high-level block diagramof a network-management agent 100 that implements the preferredembodiment of the present invention. Shown in FIG. 1 is the agent 100that comprises an input/output communications interface 102 responsiblefor the receipt of events notifications 104 from Network Resources (NRs)under the control of the agent 100 as well as of the receipt of eventnotifications 105 from other peer agents. The input/output interfacerelays the incoming notifications to a processing engine of the agent,which is yet to be described, and receives outgoing event notificationsfrom the same processing engine. In the context of the presentinvention, by peer agents it is understood a plurality of agents thatreport notifications to the same manager. The input/outputcommunications interface 102 is also responsible for the emission of theevent notifications 106 and 108 to other peer agents or to a managerrespectively. The agent 100 further comprises a Peer Agent NotificationCategory List (PANCL) 110, which contains one or more sets of peeragents' notification categories 112 and 114. A peer agent notificationcategory may contain definition of a category of notifications (acertain type of notifications) that are also to be sent to other peeragents by the agent 100. Alternatively, a peer agent notificationcategory may be implemented using a function with internal datastructure, wherein the function input is a notification and the functionoutput is either “matched” or “not matched”. For example, a simplecategory can have a function “if the NR identity contained in the inputnotification is equal to “xyz” specified in the category's internal datastructure, the output is “matched”, otherwise, the output is “notmatched”. It is to be noted that various ways exist for defining such apeer agent notification category. Besides the definition of anotification category, each shown peer notification category 112 and114, also comprises addresses 116-124 of peer agents associated witheach such notification category, which agents are to be notified uponreceipt by agent 100 of a notification that matches a given peer agentnotification category. For example, upon receipt of a notification 104,the agent 100 attempts to match the notification with the peer agentnotification categories 112 and 114, and when a match is found, theagent 100 refrains from sending the received notification to itsmanager, but rather sends it to address 116 and 118 of the peer agentsassociated with the matched category.

The agent 100 further comprises a NCL 150 (Notification CorrelationList) that stores one or more sets of peer notification category(s). Apeer notification category is related/associated therein to one or morelocal notification category(s). The NCL 150 stores information aboutwhich kind of peer notifications are related to which kind of NRnotifications”. An agent's operator may create/initialize this datastructure prior to correlation of notification.

All notifications that are transmitted from the agent 100 to the managerare also logged by the agent 100 into a manager notification log 130,which may comprise a list or database 132 that stores the sentnotifications or only their identifications.

Furthermore, the agent 100 also comprises a peer agent notificationbuffer 140, which registers notifications 105 received by the agent 100from other peer agents.

Finally, the agent 110/220 comprises a notifications processing engine133 that may be implemented in the form of software module(s) running ona computer, in the form of hardware module(s), or in any suitablecombination thereof. The notification processing engine 133 is connectedto the log 130, to the I/O interface 102, to the PANCL 110, to the NCL150 as well as to the buffer 140 via suitable links, and is configuredto retrieve, process, and send the required information, e.g. thevarious described event notifications, as described in relation to FIGS.2 and 3, which are yet to be described. Thus, it is to be understood inthe forthcoming description that the actions related to the retrieve andprocessing of information said to be performed by the agent in relationto FIGS. 2 and 3 are performed by the notifications processing engine133 of the agent.

Reference is now made jointly to FIG. 1, previously described, and toFIG. 2, which is an exemplary high-level nodal operation and signal flowdiagram of a management network 200 that implements the preferredembodiment of the present invention. Shown in FIG. 2 is the agent 1 100as previously described, a manager 210 configured to receive eventnotifications from the agent 100, and a second and a third agent 220 and230 respectively that are also configured to receive event notificationsfrom their own network resources or from a peer agent such as the agent1 100.

The agent 100 waits for the receipt of new NRs notifications, action240. In action 242, the agent 100 receives a notification from one ofthe NRs via its input interface 102. In action 244, the agent 100 mayconstruct a new NR notification that comprises all the informationcontained in the notification 242. Alternatively, action 244 may beskipped or may comprise creating a copy of the NR notification 242, oreven the selection of the same NR notification 242 for subsequent use asdescribed hereinafter. In action 246, the agent 100, checks to see ifthe NR notification (or the copy or the just constructed newnotification, all of which are herein designated using the term NRnotification) if the first event notification can be associated to oneor more other event notifications known to the first agent. For example,the agent 100 can determine if the NR notification matches any one ofthe peer agents notifications of the buffer 140, and if so, identifiesthe related peer agent notification of the buffer 140 and adds acorrelation attribute to the NR notification, to identify the matchingpeer notification using its notification identifier. Particularly, inaction 246, the agent 100 may first determines in action 248 if the NRnotification matches any of the peer agents notifications stored in thebuffer 140 and, if so adds a correlation attributes to the NRnotification and to the matching notifications from the buffer, action250. Particularly, the agent 100 may act, for each one of the matchingpeer agents' notifications of the buffer 142, to add to the NRnotification a correlation attribute that identifies the buffer'smatching peer agent notifications, action 252. The agent may furtheroptionally add to the buffer's matching peer agent notifications acorrelation attribute that identifies the NR notification, action 254.The purpose of action 250 is to correlate the new notification withother notifications received from peer agents, and optionallyvice-versa, before any of these notifications reach the manager 210, sothat the processing burden associated with the correlation operation isreduced for the manager.

If in action 248 it is rather detected that none of the buffer's peeragents notifications matches the constructed notification, action 250 isskipped.

In both cases, the method continues with action 256, where the agent 100determines if the new notification matches any of the PANCL's peernotification categories, in order to find out if the NR notificationshould be sent to any one or more of the peer agents 220 and 230 relatedto the agent 100. If no match is found between the NR notification andthe peer notification categories 112 and 114 of the PANCL 110, it isconcluded that there is no peer agent that is to be notified of the newnotification, and in action 258 the NR notification is sent to themanager 210 along with its correlation attribute 260 inserted in the NRnotification in action 252.

Although not shown in FIG. 2, upon receipt of the notification 258 bythe manager 210, the later may easily determine if the notification 258is related to other previously received notifications, or that are to bereceived, using the correlation attribute 260.

Agent 100 also acts in action 262 to update its manager's notificationslog 130 with the notification 258 sent to the manager 210.

If in action 256 it is rather found that the new notification matchesany of the PANCL's notification categories, the agent 100 furtheridentifies the addresses of the peer agent(s) associated with thematched peer notification category, action 264. For example, in action256, the agent 100 may determine that the NR notification matches thepeer notification category 112 of the PANCL 110, and in action 264 mayfurther identify the peer agents addresses 116 and 118 of the category112. Finally, in actions 266 and 270, the agent 100 transmits the newnotification 258 with its correlation attribute 260 to the identifiedaddresses 116 and 118, which in the present exemplary scenario are theones of agents 220 and 230, thus allowing these agents to attempt tocorrelate the new notification with other notifications that may receivefrom their own network resources.

Reference is now made jointly to FIG. 1, previously described, and toFIG. 3, which is a high-level nodal operation and signal flow diagram ofa management network 300 that implements the preferred embodiment of thepresent invention. Shown in FIG. 3 is the agent 2 220 as previouslydescribed, the manager 210 configured to receive event notificationsfrom the agent 2 220, and the agent 1 100 that is configured to sendevent notifications received from its own NRs to its peer agent 2 220.The agent 220 comprises an NCL 150, which stores one or more peer agentnotification categories 152 and 154 that specify categories of peeragents' notifications which the agent 220 is interested of receiving.Each such peer notification category can be associated with one or morelocal notification categories that specify categories of NRnotifications that may be received by the agent 220 directly from hisown NRs (as opposed to being received from peer agents). For example, inthis exemplary scenario illustrated in FIG. 1, the peer agentnotification category 1 152 is associated with the local notificationcategory 156, while the peer notification category 2 154 is associatedwith local notification categories 158 and 160.

In this exemplary scenario described in relation to FIG. 3, first, inaction 310, the agent 220 waits for a receipt of a peer agentsnotification from any one of its peer agents, such as for example fromagent 100. In action 312, agent 100 sends a notification to its peeragent 220. Such peer agent event notification (also called herein a peernotification or a peer agent notification) may be received in variouscircumstances, including but being not limited to when the agent 100 isconfigured to determine, upon receipt of an NR notification from one ofits own NRs, that the NR notification should also be transmitted to itspeer agents, such as described in relation to FIG. 2, action 256. Uponreceipt of the peer notification by its input interface 102 of action312, the agent 220 determines if the incoming peer notification matchesany of the NCL peer notification categories, action 314, and in thenegative, it is concluded that the peer notification cannot be used inany additional correlation with NR notifications of the agent 220, andthe peer notification 312 is thus sent to the manager 210, action 316.

If it is rather detected in action 314 that the incoming peernotification 312 matches any peer notification categories from the NCL150, the method continues with action 318 wherein the agent 220identifies which ones of the local notification categories 156-160 fromthe NCL 150 are associated to the matched peer notification categories.For example, in action 314, the agent 220 may determine that the peernotification of action 312 matches the peer notification category 152,and in action 318 the agent 220 may further identify the localnotification category 156 associated to the peer notification category152.

Thereafter, for each identified local notification categories, the agent220 determines if there are any matching logged NRs notificationsregistered in the manager's notifications log 130 that matches theidentified local notification category, action 322. Action 322 may alsoinclude determining if the peer agent event notification matches anyevent notifications identified in the log 130, which notifications weresent to the manager. In the affirmative, the agent 220 concludes thatthe incoming peer notification of action 312 is to be correlated withalready transmitted NR notifications found to match (in the log 130),and for this purpose, the agent 220 adds to the incoming peernotification a correlation attribute that specifies the identity of thematching NR notifications from the log 130, action 324. Then, the agent220 sends to the manager 210 the modified peer notification 326 with thecorrelation attribute 328, and the method returns before the action 310so that the agent 220 again waits for the receipt of another peernotification.

If in action 322 it is rather detected that there are no logged NRnotifications in the log 130 that match the identified localnotification categories, the method skips actions 324-326, i.e. there isno addition of the correlation attribute and the peer notification isnot sent to the manager 210 in action 326. Rather, the method continueswith action 330, where the agent 220 creates a peer agent notificationin the peer agent notification buffer 140, the peer agent notificationcomprising the same information as the peer notification received inaction 312, action 330. The purpose of this buffered peer notificationis to delay its emission to manager(s) in the event that during thedelay, a new correlated/related peer notification or NR notification canbe received at the agent 220, so that the correlated information can beadded into the delayed/buffered notification before its transmission tothe manager 210. When the peer agent notification is created and storedin the buffer 140, the agent 220 may also associate it with it a timerof a preset value, that defines the period of time the peer agentnotification is hold in the buffer before being sent to the manager 210.Upon expiry of the timer, action 332, the agent 220 sends the peernotification to the manager 210, and in action 336 also deletes/removesthe peer notification and the associated local notification category(s)from the buffer 140.

The agent 220 may further create a local notification category in theNCL 150, the category being the same as the category of the peernotification. The purpose of this creation being to insure fastdiscovery correlation between the buffered peer notification and newNR/peer notifications. The created local notification category is thesame set as the matched peer notification category of the NCL 150.

With reference being now made jointly to FIGS. 1, 2, and 3, the agent110/220 preferably comprises a notifications processing engine 133 thatmay be implemented in the form of software module(s) running on acomputer, in the form of hardware module(s), or in any suitablecombination thereof. The notification processing engine 133 is connectedto the log 130, to the I/O interface 102, to the PANCL 110, to the NCL150 as well as to the buffer 140 via suitable links, and is configuredto retrieve, process, and send the required information, e.g. thevarious described notifications, as described in relation to FIGS. 2 and3. Thus, upon reading the hereinabove description with respect to theseFigures, one should understand that it is the notification processingengine 133 that may be responsible of performing the described actions.

Therefore, with the present invention it becomes possible to correlateevent notifications between multiple agents before the notificationsreach a given manager, thus saving the manager's processing resourcesfor other tasks.

Based upon the foregoing, it should now be apparent to those of ordinaryskills in the art that the present invention provides an advantageoussolution, which offers a simple and efficient method and agent forcorrelating event notifications with the ones of at least one otheragent. Although the system and method of the present invention have beendescribed in particular reference to certain terminology (e.g. agentsand manager), it should be realized upon reference hereto that theinnovative teachings contained herein are not necessarily limitedthereto and may be implemented advantageously in various types of nodes.While the method and system shown and described have been characterizedas being preferred, it will be readily apparent that various changes andmodifications could be made therein without departing from the scope ofthe invention as defined by the claims set forth hereinbelow.

Although several preferred embodiments of the method and system of thepresent invention have been illustrated in the accompanying Drawings anddescribed in the foregoing Detailed Description, it will be understoodthat the invention is not limited to the embodiments disclosed, but iscapable of numerous rearrangements, modifications and substitutionswithout departing from the spirit of the invention as set forth anddefined by the following claims.

1. A method for correlating event notifications comprising the steps of:a. receiving a first event notification at a first agent of a managementnetwork; b. determining at the first agent if the first eventnotification matches a peer agent notification category that defines acategory of event notifications a second agent of the management networkis interested in receiving from the first agent; and c. upon positivedetermination of step b., sending the first event notification to thesecond agent.
 2. The method claimed in claim 1, further comprising thesteps of: d. determining at the first agent if the first eventnotification can be associated to a second event notification known tothe first agent; and e. if the first event notification can beassociated to the second notification, correlating at the first agentthe first event notification with the second event notification.
 3. Themethod claimed in claim 1, further comprising the steps of: d. uponnegative determination of step b., sending the first event notificationto a manager of the management network.
 4. The method claimed in claim1, wherein the first event notification is a Network Resource (NR) eventnotification received by the first agent from an NR, wherein step b.comprises the steps of: b.1. determining if the NR event notificationmatches any peer agent notification categories of a Peer AgentNotification Category List (PANCL) of the first agent; and b.2. for eachmatched peer agent notification category of the PANCL, determining oneor more peer agents associated with the matched peer agent notificationcategory.
 5. The method claimed in claim 2, wherein the first eventnotification is a Network Resource (NR) event notification received bythe first agent from an NR, wherein step d. comprises the step ofdetermining if the NR event notification matches any event notificationsreceived by the first agent from peer agents; and wherein step e.comprises the step of including, at the first agent, in the NR eventnotification, an identity of the second event notification that matchedthe NR event notification, the second event notification being receivedby the first agent from one of the peer agents.
 6. A first agent of amanagement network comprising: an input interface receiving a firstevent notification; a Peer Agent Notification Category List (PANCL)storing one or more peer agent notification categories, each beingindicative of a category of event notifications that other agents areinterested in receiving from the first agent; and a notificationsprocessing engine receiving the first event notification from the inputinterface and determining if the first event notification matches thepeer agent notification categories of the PANCL, and upon positivedetermination, the notifications processing engine sending the firstevent notification at least to a second agent associated with a matchedpeer agent notification category of the PANCL.
 7. The first agentclaimed in claim 6, further comprising: a peer agents notificationsbuffer storing event notifications received by the first agent from oneor more peer agents; wherein the notifications processing enginedetermines if the first event notification can be associated to a secondevent notification from the buffer, and if so, further acts to correlatethe first event notification with the second event notification.
 8. Thefirst agent claimed in claim 6, wherein when the notificationsprocessing engine determines that the first event notification does notmatch any peer agent notification categories of the PANCL, thenotifications processing engine sends the first event notification to amanager of the management network.
 9. The first agent claimed in claim6, wherein the first event notification is a Network Resource (NR) eventnotification received by the first agent from an NR, wherein thenotifications processing engine determines if the NR event notificationmatches any peer agent notification categories of a Peer AgentNotification Category List (PANCL) of the first agent and, for eachmatched peer agent notification category of the PANCL, determinesaddresses of one or more peer agents associated with the matched peeragent notification category.
 10. The first agent claimed in claim 7,wherein the first event notification is a Network Resource (NR) eventnotification received by the first agent from an NR, the notificationsprocessing engine determines if the NR event notification matches anyevent notifications received by the first agent from the peer agents andincludes in the NR event notification an identity of the second eventnotification that matched the NR event notification, the second eventnotification being received by the first agent from one of the peeragents.
 11. A method for correlating event notifications comprising thesteps of: a. receiving at a first agent of a management network a peeragent event notification from a peer agent; b. determining at the firstagent if the peer agent event notification matches any eventnotifications that the first agent sent to a manager; and c. upondetermining that the peer agent event notification matches an eventnotification that the first agent sent to a manager, correlating thepeer agent event notification with the event notification the firstagent sent to a manager.
 12. The method claimed in claim 1, furthercomprising the steps of: d. upon determining that the peer agent eventnotification does not match event notifications that the first agentsent to a manager, storing the peer agent event notification for apre-determined period of time by the first agent.
 13. The method claimedin claim 1, further comprising the step of: d. sending the peer agentevent notification to the manager of the management network.
 14. Themethod claimed in claim 1, further comprising the steps of: d.identifying local event notifications categories associated with thepeer agent event notification; and wherein step b. comprises the step ofdetermining if any one of the identified local event notificationcategories comprises any event notifications that the first agent sentto the manager that match the peer agent event notification.
 15. Themethod claimed in claim 1, wherein step c. comprises including in thepeer agent event notification a correlation attribute comprising anidentity of the event notification that the first agent sent to themanager.
 16. A first agent of a management network, comprising: an inputinterface receiving a peer agent event notification from a peer agent; amanager notifications log storing identities of event notifications sentfrom the first agent to a manager of the management network; and anotifications processing engine receiving the peer agent eventnotification from the input interface and determining if the receivedpeer agent event notification matches any event notifications of themanager notifications log and, upon determining that the peer agentevent notification matches an event notification of the log, correlatingthe peer agent event notification with the event notification of thelog.
 17. The first agent claimed in claim 1, further comprising: a peeragents notifications buffer that stores peer agent event notificationsreceived by the first agent from peer agents; the notificationsprocessing engine determining that the peer agent event notificationdoes not match event notifications of the manager notifications log andstoring the peer agent event notification for a pre-determined period oftime in the buffer.
 18. The first agent claimed in claim 1, wherein thenotifications processing engine sends the peer agent event notificationto the manager of the management network.
 19. The first agent claimed inclaim 1, further comprising: a Notifications Category List (NCL) storinglocal event categories of event notifications received by the firstagent from Network resources (NRs); wherein the notifications processingengine identifies local event notifications categories of the NCL thatare associated with the peer agent event notification, and furtherdetermines if any event notifications of the log match any one of theidentified local event notification categories.
 20. The first agent inclaim 1, wherein the notifications processing engine includes in thepeer agent event a correlation attribute comprising an identity of theevent notification that the first agent sent to the manager.